Impact of hedonic evaluation on consumers’ preferences for beef enriched with Omega 3: A Generalized Multinomial Logit Model approach ID 371 Yasmina BABA 1, Zein KALLAS 2, José Maria GIL 2, Carolina REALINI 3 1 I NSTITUTO DE S OSTENIBILIDAD, UPC, B ARCELONA, S PAIN. 2 CREDA, C ASTELLDEFELS, S PAIN. 3 IRTA, M ONELLS, S PAIN.

 CONSUMERS usually face a COMPLEX DECISION process.  MANY CHARACTERISTICS and several products' ALTERNATIVES.  Such COMPLEXITY entangles the determination of the FACTORS that AFFECT the consumer’s DECISION MAKING.  CONSUMERS usually face a COMPLEX DECISION process.  MANY CHARACTERISTICS and several products' ALTERNATIVES.  Such COMPLEXITY entangles the determination of the FACTORS that AFFECT the consumer’s DECISION MAKING.  HEALTH CONCERNS are one of the MOST IMPORTANT PREDICTORS for food consumption.  FAT CONTENT is receiving HIGHER ATTENTION over the last decades.  HEALTH CONCERNS are one of the MOST IMPORTANT PREDICTORS for food consumption.  FAT CONTENT is receiving HIGHER ATTENTION over the last decades. MOTIVATION

 Food & beverage DEMANDS has EVOLVED towards new range of products often related to HEALTH-PROMOTION & DISEASE PREVENTION.  Consumers increased their INTEREST in the HEALTH BENEFITS of such products. The number of REDUCED-FAT FOODS is INCREASING. Foods with increased levels of UNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS (OMEGA 3) are gaining MARKET SHARES (Milk, eggs…).  Food & beverage DEMANDS has EVOLVED towards new range of products often related to HEALTH-PROMOTION & DISEASE PREVENTION.  Consumers increased their INTEREST in the HEALTH BENEFITS of such products. The number of REDUCED-FAT FOODS is INCREASING. Foods with increased levels of UNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS (OMEGA 3) are gaining MARKET SHARES (Milk, eggs…). MOTIVATION

FIRST OBJECTIVE  SPANISH Consumers’ PREFERENCES toward BEEF MEAT ENRICHED with POLYUNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS:  Omega 3.  Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA).  SPANISH Consumers’ PREFERENCES toward BEEF MEAT ENRICHED with POLYUNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS:  Omega 3.  Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA).

CLA Omega 3 3. EMPIRICAL APPLICATION: Experimental design FIRST OBJECTIVE

3. EMPIRICAL APPLICATION: Experimental design

 SENSORY ATTRIBUTES are also decisive factors for ACCEPTANCE of food.  TASTE (Flavour, odour …) are a primary basis to make REPEAT PURCHASES of a product.  HEALTH and NUTRITION information together with EATING EXPERIENCE are all relevant for a POSITIVE valuation of specific FUNCTIONAL FOOD.  SENSORY ATTRIBUTES are also decisive factors for ACCEPTANCE of food.  TASTE (Flavour, odour …) are a primary basis to make REPEAT PURCHASES of a product.  HEALTH and NUTRITION information together with EATING EXPERIENCE are all relevant for a POSITIVE valuation of specific FUNCTIONAL FOOD. MOTIVATION

 Many studies have analysed consumers’ PREFERENCES, ATTITUDES and ACCEPTANCE towards BEEF.  However, LITERATURE that analyses HOW the HEDONIC VALUATION (EATING AND SENSORY EXPERIENCE) affect consumers’ purchasing decisions is STILL SCARCE and remains UNTREATED for BEEF ENRICHED with POLYUNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS, particularly in SPAIN.  Many studies have analysed consumers’ PREFERENCES, ATTITUDES and ACCEPTANCE towards BEEF.  However, LITERATURE that analyses HOW the HEDONIC VALUATION (EATING AND SENSORY EXPERIENCE) affect consumers’ purchasing decisions is STILL SCARCE and remains UNTREATED for BEEF ENRICHED with POLYUNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS, particularly in SPAIN. MOTIVATION

SECOND OBJECTIVE  To analyse the IMPACT OF HEDONIC EVALUATION, for both INFORMED and NON-INFORMED CONSUMERS, on the EXPECTED PREFERENCES for BEEF ENRICHED with omega-3 and CLA by comparing PREFERENCES BEFORE ante AFTER TASTING experience.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH  We attempt to MIMIC CONSUMERS’ behaviour towards a novel product which can be summarized in 3 MAIN SUBSEQUENT steps: 1.When consumers face an NEW PRODUCT on store shelves they generate EXPECTATIONS on the basis of their PAST EXPERIENCES and AVAILABLE INFORMATION  CHOICE EXPERIMENTS (CE).  We attempt to MIMIC CONSUMERS’ behaviour towards a novel product which can be summarized in 3 MAIN SUBSEQUENT steps: 1.When consumers face an NEW PRODUCT on store shelves they generate EXPECTATIONS on the basis of their PAST EXPERIENCES and AVAILABLE INFORMATION  CHOICE EXPERIMENTS (CE).

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 2.Consumers TASTE the new product allows CONSTRUCTING A CURRENT SENSORY EXPERIENCE that is useful to decide for a repeated choice or not  SENSORY TEST.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 3.After tasting the new product, consumers’ acceptance may result in AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT with what they EXPECTED. These changes play an important role in the final choice of the consumers  WE REPEAT THE SAME CHOICE EXPERIMENT.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: First and the third steps, the CE  Within the range of techniques that analyze consumers’ preferences, we used The CHOICE EXPERIMENT (CE) due to its capacity to analyze preferences for ‘COMPLEX GOODS’.  The conceptual foundations of CE rely on two main theories: a) LANCASTER’S THEORY OF VALUE which proposes that utilities for goods can be DECOMPOSED into separable utilities for their characteristics or ATTRIBUTES. b) RANDOM UTILITY THEORY which explains the DOMINANCE JUDGMENTS made between pairs of offerings.  The conceptual foundations of CE rely on two main theories: a) LANCASTER’S THEORY OF VALUE which proposes that utilities for goods can be DECOMPOSED into separable utilities for their characteristics or ATTRIBUTES. b) RANDOM UTILITY THEORY which explains the DOMINANCE JUDGMENTS made between pairs of offerings.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: First and the third steps, the CE  The product is DESCRIBED through an array of ATTRIBUTES.  The COMBINATION of attributes’ levels following orthogonal designs allow to create hypothetical scenarios: “ALTERNATIVES”.  Alternatives are ARRANGED together following experiment designs to constitute “CHOICE SETS”.  Respondent are ASKED to chose between the ALTERNATIVES in each CHOICE SET.  The product is DESCRIBED through an array of ATTRIBUTES.  The COMBINATION of attributes’ levels following orthogonal designs allow to create hypothetical scenarios: “ALTERNATIVES”.  Alternatives are ARRANGED together following experiment designs to constitute “CHOICE SETS”.  Respondent are ASKED to chose between the ALTERNATIVES in each CHOICE SET.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: First and the third steps, the CE Utility Theory Multinomial Logit Model  It imposes HOMOGENEITY in preferences for observed attribute.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: First and the third steps, the CE Mixed Logit Model  It accommodates for the UNOBSERVED HETEROGENEITY by allowing RANDOM COEFFICIENTS on attributes.  Recent STUDIES ARGUED that much of the PREFERENCE HETEROGENEITY can be better captured by the SCALE.  The MIXL turns to be likely a POOR APPROXIMATION if scale heterogeneity is NOT ACCOUNTED FOR.  It accommodates for the UNOBSERVED HETEROGENEITY by allowing RANDOM COEFFICIENTS on attributes.  Recent STUDIES ARGUED that much of the PREFERENCE HETEROGENEITY can be better captured by the SCALE.  The MIXL turns to be likely a POOR APPROXIMATION if scale heterogeneity is NOT ACCOUNTED FOR.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: First and the third steps, the CE Error term Generalized Multinomial Logit Model  The relative importance of attributes are calculated

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Empirical application of the CE Attributes  ORIGIN: locally produced or not.  MEAT COLOUR: pale red or bright red meat.  FAT CONTENT: moderate visible fat or slight visible fat.  ENRICHMENT: conventional, enriched with Omega-3, with CLA and with both Omega3 + CLA.  PRICE: was defined in € per tray of 0.3 kg: 6.6€ as high, 5.7€ as medium-high, 4.8€ as medium-low and 3.9€ as low.  ORIGIN: locally produced or not.  MEAT COLOUR: pale red or bright red meat.  FAT CONTENT: moderate visible fat or slight visible fat.  ENRICHMENT: conventional, enriched with Omega-3, with CLA and with both Omega3 + CLA.  PRICE: was defined in € per tray of 0.3 kg: 6.6€ as high, 5.7€ as medium-high, 4.8€ as medium-low and 3.9€ as low.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Empirical application of the CE Experimental Design  The full factorial design  a total of 128 (4 2 x2 3 ) ‘alternatives’.  3 alternative by choice sets  (4 2 x2 3 ) 3 possible combinations.  Follow a MAIN EFFECT ORTHOGONAL FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL DESIGN: 16 choice sets.  However, there were still too many questions for a single respondent which is COGNITIVE burden and TIME consuming.  We used FACTORIAL BLOCKING arrangement, obtaining two blocks, each with 8 CHOICE SETS.  The full factorial design  a total of 128 (4 2 x2 3 ) ‘alternatives’.  3 alternative by choice sets  (4 2 x2 3 ) 3 possible combinations.  Follow a MAIN EFFECT ORTHOGONAL FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL DESIGN: 16 choice sets.  However, there were still too many questions for a single respondent which is COGNITIVE burden and TIME consuming.  We used FACTORIAL BLOCKING arrangement, obtaining two blocks, each with 8 CHOICE SETS.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Empirical application of the CE Choice set

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Empirical application of the CE Data collection PAMPLONA (Basque Country) 240 BARCELONA (Catalonia) 240 ZARAGOZA (Rest of Spain) 240  Face-to-face questionnaire completed in a controlled environment. The population represents consumers who REGULARLY PURCHASE FOOD and beverages and having PURCHASED BEEF MEAT IN THE LAST MONTH.  Quota sampling stratified by GENDER and AGE.  Face-to-face questionnaire completed in a controlled environment. The population represents consumers who REGULARLY PURCHASE FOOD and beverages and having PURCHASED BEEF MEAT IN THE LAST MONTH.  Quota sampling stratified by GENDER and AGE.

Sample by CITY 240 Sample A 120 ( CE without information) Repeat the CE 120 Sample B 120 ( CE with information) Repeat the CE 120 Sensory test Informed about what they taste Bloc 1 (60) Bloc 2 (60) Bloc 1 (60) Bloc 2 (60) 3 cities METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Empirical application of the CE Data collection

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: The second step the sensory test  They taste (BLIND CONDITIONS) 4 TYPES OF BEEF: 1) CONVENTIONAL, 2) ENRICHED with OMEGA3, 3) ENRICHED with CLA, 4) ENRICHED with both CLA and OMEGA3.  Each consumer rated OVERALL LIKING using a 9-POINT SCALE (1 ‘dislike extremely’, 2 ‘dislike very much’, 3 ‘dislike moderately’, 4 ‘dislike slightly’, 5 ‘neither like nor dislike’ 6 ‘like slightly’, 7 ‘like moderately’, 8 ‘like very much’, 9 ‘like extremely’.  They taste (BLIND CONDITIONS) 4 TYPES OF BEEF: 1) CONVENTIONAL, 2) ENRICHED with OMEGA3, 3) ENRICHED with CLA, 4) ENRICHED with both CLA and OMEGA3.  Each consumer rated OVERALL LIKING using a 9-POINT SCALE (1 ‘dislike extremely’, 2 ‘dislike very much’, 3 ‘dislike moderately’, 4 ‘dislike slightly’, 5 ‘neither like nor dislike’ 6 ‘like slightly’, 7 ‘like moderately’, 8 ‘like very much’, 9 ‘like extremely’.

 Where from we GET THE ENRICHED BEEF? WE PRODUCE IT  Cows were FED A DIET that include flax among other grains and later TESTED IN LABORATORY for the content of Omega 3 and LCA.  ANIMALS WERE SLAUGHTERED with an average live weight of 458.4±16.6 kg at an EU-licensed commercial abattoir following STANDARD PROCEDURES.  Cows were FED A DIET that include flax among other grains and later TESTED IN LABORATORY for the content of Omega 3 and LCA.  ANIMALS WERE SLAUGHTERED with an average live weight of 458.4±16.6 kg at an EU-licensed commercial abattoir following STANDARD PROCEDURES. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: The second step the sensory test

Results: SENSORY TEST Type of beef meat Overall acceptability P value ** Without information With information Conventional Enriched with omega Enriched with CLA Enriched with omega-3 & CLA INFORMATION about the benefits of n-3 and CLA fatty acids did NOT HAVE AN INFLUENCE on their SENSORY EVALUATIONS for (P>0.05). 2.Beef ENRICHED with n-3 fatty acids had HIGHER LIKING scores than beef from the other three treatments. 1.INFORMATION about the benefits of n-3 and CLA fatty acids did NOT HAVE AN INFLUENCE on their SENSORY EVALUATIONS for (P>0.05). 2.Beef ENRICHED with n-3 fatty acids had HIGHER LIKING scores than beef from the other three treatments.

Attributes Generalized Multinomial Logit model (Relative importance) Without informationWith information Pre SensoryPost sensoryPre SensoryPost sensory Fat content *** (25.1; 48.4) 19.46% *** (12.2; 26.7) ** (7.7; 31.6) 16.45% *** (9.4; 23.5) Colour *** (13.1; 30.6) 11.78% *** (7.2; 16.2) *** (10.3; 23.6) 10.57% *** (6.5; 14.6) Origin *** (12.7; 25.9) 7.14% *** (3.2; 11.0) *** (9.1; 21.0) 8.62% *** (4.8; 12.4) Diet 1.72 (-7.6; 11.0) 35.98% *** (26.9; 45.1) *** (15.4; 30.0) 34.79% *** (25.8; 43.8) Price *** (11.1; 29.5) 25.66% *** (19.3; 31.9) *** (17.4; 33.9) 29.57% *** (23.4; 35.8)  The ORDER OF THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE of the expected preference was slightly different, showing that the information provided HAD AN IMPACT on their choices. Results: Impact of INFORMATION on the relative importance

Results: Impact of INFORMATION on the relative importance Attributes Generalized Multinomial Logit model (Relative importance) Without informationWith information Pre SensoryPost sensoryPre SensoryPost sensory Fat content *** (25.1; 48.4) 19.46% *** (12.2; 26.7) ** (7.7; 31.6) 16.45% *** (9.4; 23.5) Colour *** (13.1; 30.6) 11.78% *** (7.2; 16.2) *** (10.3; 23.6) 10.57% *** (6.5; 14.6) Origin *** (12.7; 25.9) 7.14% *** (3.2; 11.0) *** (9.1; 21.0) 8.62% *** (4.8; 12.4) Diet 1.72 (-7.6; 11.0) 35.98% *** (26.9; 45.1) *** (15.4; 30.0) 34.79% *** (25.8; 43.8) Price *** (11.1; 29.5) 25.66% *** (19.3; 31.9) *** (17.4; 33.9) 29.57% *** (23.4; 35.8)  FAT CONTENT was the MOST IMPORTANT attribute for the UNINFORMED consumers while it was LESS IMPORTANT for INFORMED one. There is a clear SUBSTITUTION EFFECT between the DIET and the FAT CONTENT.

Results: Impact of INFORMATION on the relative importance Attributes Generalized Multinomial Logit model (Relative importance) Without informationWith information Pre SensoryPost sensoryPre SensoryPost sensory Fat content *** (25.1; 48.4) 19.46% *** (12.2; 26.7) ** (7.7; 31.6) 16.45% *** (9.4; 23.5) Colour *** (13.1; 30.6) 11.78% *** (7.2; 16.2) *** (10.3; 23.6) 10.57% *** (6.5; 14.6) Origin *** (12.7; 25.9) 7.14% *** (3.2; 11.0) *** (9.1; 21.0) 8.62% *** (4.8; 12.4) Diet 1.72 (-7.6; 11.0) 35.98% *** (26.9; 45.1) *** (15.4; 30.0) 34.79% *** (25.8; 43.8) Price *** (11.1; 29.5) 25.66% *** (19.3; 31.9) *** (17.4; 33.9) 29.57% *** (23.4; 35.8)  It is evident that consumers are LESS CONCERNED about the AMOUNT OF VISIBLE FAT in beef, as long as it IS ENRICHED with beneficial fatty acids.

Results: Impact of SENSORY experience on the relative importance Attributes Generalized Multinomial Logit model (Relative importance) Without informationWith information Pre SensoryPost sensoryPre SensoryPost sensory Fat content *** (25.1; 48.4) 19.46% *** (12.2; 26.7) ** (7.7; 31.6) 16.45% *** (9.4; 23.5) Colour *** (13.1; 30.6) 11.78% *** (7.2; 16.2) *** (10.3; 23.6) 10.57% *** (6.5; 14.6) Origin *** (12.7; 25.9) 7.14% *** (3.2; 11.0) *** (9.1; 21.0) 8.62% *** (4.8; 12.4) Diet 1.72 (-7.6; 11.0) 35.98% *** (26.9; 45.1) *** (15.4; 30.0) 34.79% *** (25.8; 43.8) Price *** (11.1; 29.5) 25.66% *** (19.3; 31.9) *** (17.4; 33.9) 29.57% *** (23.4; 35.8)  Significant MODIFICATIONS for the UNINFORMED consumers, while MINOR CHANGES occurred for INFORMED one.

Results: Impact of SENSORY experience on the relative importance Attributes Generalized Multinomial Logit model (Relative importance) Without informationWith information Pre SensoryPost sensoryPre SensoryPost sensory Fat content *** (25.1; 48.4) 19.46% *** (12.2; 26.7) ** (7.7; 31.6) 16.45% *** (9.4; 23.5) Colour *** (13.1; 30.6) 11.78% *** (7.2; 16.2) *** (10.3; 23.6) 10.57% *** (6.5; 14.6) Origin *** (12.7; 25.9) 7.14% *** (3.2; 11.0) *** (9.1; 21.0) 8.62% *** (4.8; 12.4) Diet 1.72 (-7.6; 11.0) 35.98% *** (26.9; 45.1) *** (15.4; 30.0) 34.79% *** (25.8; 43.8) Price *** (11.1; 29.5) 25.66% *** (19.3; 31.9) *** (17.4; 33.9) 29.57% *** (23.4; 35.8)  Consumers with the ABSENCE OF INFORMATION, may have TENTATIVE AND UNCERTAIN EXPECTATIONS. Therefore, the significant changes between the EXPECTED and EXPERIENCED preferences ARE MORE REMARKABLE.

Attributes Generalized Multinomial Logit model (Relative importance) Without informationWith information Pre SensoryPost sensoryPre SensoryPost sensory Fat content *** (25.1; 48.4) 19.46% *** (12.2; 26.7) ** (7.7; 31.6) 16.45% *** (9.4; 23.5) Colour *** (13.1; 30.6) 11.78% *** (7.2; 16.2) *** (10.3; 23.6) 10.57% *** (6.5; 14.6) Origin *** (12.7; 25.9) 7.14% *** (3.2; 11.0) *** (9.1; 21.0) 8.62% *** (4.8; 12.4) Diet 1.72 (-7.6; 11.0) 35.98% *** (26.9; 45.1) *** (15.4; 30.0) 34.79% *** (25.8; 43.8) Price *** (11.1; 29.5) 25.66% *** (19.3; 31.9) *** (17.4; 33.9) 29.57% *** (23.4; 35.8) Results: Impact of SENSORY experience on the relative importance  The RELATIVE IMPORTANCE of the DIET attribute INCREASED significantly once the products were EXPERIENCED and turned to be one of the most important factors.

Without informationWith information ExpectedExperiencedExpectedExperienced Random Parameters in utility functions (  ) Moderate visible fat-0.50 *** *** *** *** Pale red-0.30 *** *** *** *** Other Spanish origin-0.26 ** ** *** *** Enriched with n *** 0.19 *** 0.42 *** Enriched with CLA Enriched with n-3 & CLA * 0.33 *** 0.49 *** Price 6.6€ (high)-0.52 *** *** *** *** Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.11 *** *** 0.02 Price 4.8€ (medium-low)0.37 *** 0.38 *** 0.32 *** 0.41 *** Opt-Out0.48 *** 0.44 *** Scale parameters Variance parameter in scale parameter0.56 *** * 0.11 Weighting parameter Gamma0.34 *** 0.31 *** 0.10 Standard deviations of parameters distribution Std. Dev. Moderate visible fat1.63 *** 1.58 *** 2.14 *** 1.82 *** Std. Dev. Pale red0.95 *** 0.11 ** 0.90 *** 0.19 *** Std. Dev. Other Spanish origin0.15 ** 0.26 *** 0.16 *** 0.28 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n *** 1.08 *** 0.52 *** 1.71 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with CLA0.31 *** 1.37 *** *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n-3 & CLA0.56 *** 1.97 *** 0.65 *** *** Std. Dev. Price 6.6€ (high)1.67 *** 1.48 *** 1.41 *** 1.57 *** Std. Dev. Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.61 *** 0.76 *** 0.51 *** 0.76 *** Std. Dev. Price 4.8€ (medium-low)1.06 *** *** 0.77 *** 0.79 *** Std. Dev. Opt-Out2.39 *** 2.30 *** 2.12 *** 2.60 *** Log-Likelihood (θ)-2, Log-Likelihood (0)-3, , LL ratio test1, *** 1, *** 1, *** *** Pseudo R AIC/N Impact of INFORMATION on expected preferences  Consumers that DO NOT RECEIVE INFORMATION about the benefits of n-3 and CLA fatty acids or their role in human health are more CONCERNED about the AMOUNT of FAT in meat.

Without informationWith information ExpectedExperiencedExpectedExperienced Random Parameters in utility functions (  ) Moderate visible fat-0.50 *** *** *** *** Pale red-0.30 *** *** *** *** Other Spanish origin-0.26 ** ** *** *** Enriched with n *** 0.19 *** 0.42 *** Enriched with CLA Enriched with n-3 & CLA * 0.33 *** 0.49 *** Price 6.6€ (high)-0.52 *** *** *** *** Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.11 *** *** 0.02 Price 4.8€ (medium-low)0.37 *** 0.38 *** 0.32 *** 0.41 *** Opt-Out0.48 *** 0.44 *** Scale parameters Variance parameter in scale parameter0.56 *** * 0.11 Weighting parameter Gamma0.34 *** 0.31 *** 0.10 Standard deviations of parameters distribution Std. Dev. Moderate visible fat1.63 *** 1.58 *** 2.14 *** 1.82 *** Std. Dev. Pale red0.95 *** 0.11 ** 0.90 *** 0.19 *** Std. Dev. Other Spanish origin0.15 ** 0.26 *** 0.16 *** 0.28 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n *** 1.08 *** 0.52 *** 1.71 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with CLA0.31 *** 1.37 *** *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n-3 & CLA0.56 *** 1.97 *** 0.65 *** *** Std. Dev. Price 6.6€ (high)1.67 *** 1.48 *** 1.41 *** 1.57 *** Std. Dev. Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.61 *** 0.76 *** 0.51 *** 0.76 *** Std. Dev. Price 4.8€ (medium-low)1.06 *** *** 0.77 *** 0.79 *** Std. Dev. Opt-Out2.39 *** 2.30 *** 2.12 *** 2.60 *** Log-Likelihood (θ)-2, Log-Likelihood (0)-3, , LL ratio test1, *** 1, *** 1, *** *** Pseudo R AIC/N Impact of sensory experience on expected preferences  The utility for the ENRICHED MEAT WITH N-3 increased.  The LACK of preference for the CLA ENRICHED BEEF.  The utility for the ENRICHED MEAT WITH N-3 increased.  The LACK of preference for the CLA ENRICHED BEEF.  Consumers may be LESS CONCERNED about the AMOUNT OF FAT in meat if they are aware that SENSORY PROPERTIES are NOT COMPROMISED when meat is enriched with BENEFICIAL FATTY ACIDS.

Without informationWith information ExpectedExperiencedExpectedExperienced Random Parameters in utility functions (  ) Moderate visible fat-0.50 *** *** *** *** Pale red-0.30 *** *** *** *** Other Spanish origin-0.26 ** ** *** *** Enriched with n *** 0.19 *** 0.42 *** Enriched with CLA Enriched with n-3 & CLA * 0.33 *** 0.49 *** Price 6.6€ (high)-0.52 *** *** *** *** Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.11 *** *** 0.02 Price 4.8€ (medium-low)0.37 *** 0.38 *** 0.32 *** 0.41 *** Opt-Out0.48 *** 0.44 *** Scale parameters Variance parameter in scale parameter0.56 *** * 0.11 Weighting parameter Gamma0.34 *** 0.31 *** 0.10 Standard deviations of parameters distribution Std. Dev. Moderate visible fat1.63 *** 1.58 *** 2.14 *** 1.82 *** Std. Dev. Pale red0.95 *** 0.11 ** 0.90 *** 0.19 *** Std. Dev. Other Spanish origin0.15 ** 0.26 *** 0.16 *** 0.28 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n *** 1.08 *** 0.52 *** 1.71 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with CLA0.31 *** 1.37 *** *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n-3 & CLA0.56 *** 1.97 *** 0.65 *** *** Std. Dev. Price 6.6€ (high)1.67 *** 1.48 *** 1.41 *** 1.57 *** Std. Dev. Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.61 *** 0.76 *** 0.51 *** 0.76 *** Std. Dev. Price 4.8€ (medium-low)1.06 *** *** 0.77 *** 0.79 *** Std. Dev. Opt-Out2.39 *** 2.30 *** 2.12 *** 2.60 *** Log-Likelihood (θ)-2, Log-Likelihood (0)-3, , LL ratio test1, *** 1, *** 1, *** *** Pseudo R AIC/N  Focusing on the SCALE parameters, the INFORMATION and the SENSORY EXPERIENCE have had a significant impact.  The average error scales DECREASED when moving from for UNINFORMED TO INFORMED consumers.  This may indicate that when the CONSUMERS are INFORMED they make MORE RELIABLE choices.  Focusing on the SCALE parameters, the INFORMATION and the SENSORY EXPERIENCE have had a significant impact.  The average error scales DECREASED when moving from for UNINFORMED TO INFORMED consumers.  This may indicate that when the CONSUMERS are INFORMED they make MORE RELIABLE choices.

Without informationWith information ExpectedExperiencedExpectedExperienced Random Parameters in utility functions (  ) Moderate visible fat-0.50 *** *** *** *** Pale red-0.30 *** *** *** *** Other Spanish origin-0.26 ** ** *** *** Enriched with n *** 0.19 *** 0.42 *** Enriched with CLA Enriched with n-3 & CLA * 0.33 *** 0.49 *** Price 6.6€ (high)-0.52 *** *** *** *** Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.11 *** *** 0.02 Price 4.8€ (medium-low)0.37 *** 0.38 *** 0.32 *** 0.41 *** Opt-Out0.48 *** 0.44 *** Scale parameters Variance parameter in scale parameter0.56 *** * 0.11 Weighting parameter Gamma0.34 *** 0.31 *** 0.10 Standard deviations of parameters distribution Std. Dev. Moderate visible fat1.63 *** 1.58 *** 2.14 *** 1.82 *** Std. Dev. Pale red0.95 *** 0.11 ** 0.90 *** 0.19 *** Std. Dev. Other Spanish origin0.15 ** 0.26 *** 0.16 *** 0.28 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n *** 1.08 *** 0.52 *** 1.71 *** Std. Dev. Enriched with CLA0.31 *** 1.37 *** *** Std. Dev. Enriched with n-3 & CLA0.56 *** 1.97 *** 0.65 *** *** Std. Dev. Price 6.6€ (high)1.67 *** 1.48 *** 1.41 *** 1.57 *** Std. Dev. Price 5.7€ (medium-high)0.61 *** 0.76 *** 0.51 *** 0.76 *** Std. Dev. Price 4.8€ (medium-low)1.06 *** *** 0.77 *** 0.79 *** Std. Dev. Opt-Out2.39 *** 2.30 *** 2.12 *** 2.60 *** Log-Likelihood (θ)-2, Log-Likelihood (0)-3, , LL ratio test1, *** 1, *** 1, *** *** Pseudo R AIC/N  SENSORY experience showed EVIDENCE of a SHIFT in the scaling factor across choice (the error scale turns out to be insignificant).  After the TASTING EXPERIENCE, consumers tended to make more RELIABLE CHOICE.  SENSORY experience showed EVIDENCE of a SHIFT in the scaling factor across choice (the error scale turns out to be insignificant).  After the TASTING EXPERIENCE, consumers tended to make more RELIABLE CHOICE.

Conclusions  Providing INFORMATION to consumers about the role of beneficial fatty acids and their potential HEALTH BENEFITS would FAVOR MARKETING of n-3 enriched beef through modifications in animal diet.  SENSORY EXPERIENCE had a significant IMPACT on defining consumer preferences for beef attributes, especially for UNINFORMED consumer.  Enrichment of beef with CLA was NOT POSITIVELY valued by consumers, REGARDLESS of the INFORMATION provided and the TASTING experience.  Providing INFORMATION to consumers about the role of beneficial fatty acids and their potential HEALTH BENEFITS would FAVOR MARKETING of n-3 enriched beef through modifications in animal diet.  SENSORY EXPERIENCE had a significant IMPACT on defining consumer preferences for beef attributes, especially for UNINFORMED consumer.  Enrichment of beef with CLA was NOT POSITIVELY valued by consumers, REGARDLESS of the INFORMATION provided and the TASTING experience.

conclusions  The, SENSORY TEST and the INFORMATION DECREASED the SCALE HETEROGENEITY term.  MARKETING OPPORTUNITIES for n-3 enriched beef seem PROMISING in SPAIN.  Analyzing the attributes NON-ATTENDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER SENSORY are proposed for further research  The, SENSORY TEST and the INFORMATION DECREASED the SCALE HETEROGENEITY term.  MARKETING OPPORTUNITIES for n-3 enriched beef seem PROMISING in SPAIN.  Analyzing the attributes NON-ATTENDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER SENSORY are proposed for further research

Thank you for your attention